Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

"Internet piracy bill: A free speech 'kill switch'"

It’s coming — and in fact, we’ve already seen it with Google and YouTube, who routinely pull down content and block users accounts for such bogus reasons as “privacy violations” and the like.

There’s no recourse, once the government gives the clampdown on speech its imprimatur. You are a slave to the bureaucratic morass. By design.

It’s all meant not simply to silence you, but to frustrate you — and ultimately, to convince you that it’s better to join the system than to try and beat it. It pays to engage in the two minutes of hate rather than feel its wrath.

Part of parcel of the totalitarian mindset, which is always sold as a “reform” movement.

You will be assimilated. May as well learn to lay back and enjoy being broken with the velvety Nannyfist of benign and benevolent government, whether it’s Caligula or one of his corporate cronies delivering the buttered plunge.

Mmmmm. Hurts so good.

23 Replies to “"Internet piracy bill: A free speech 'kill switch'"”

  1. happyfeet says:

    here is at least a partial list of Rs who are eager to piss on liberty

    I’m sorry to see Marsha Blackburn on this list I thought she had better sense.

    The other Rs are…

    Lamar Smith [R-TX]
    Mary Bono Mack [R-CA]
    Steve Chabot [R-OH]
    Elton Gallegly [R-CA]
    Bob Goodlatte [R-VA]
    Timothy Griffin [R-AR]
    Dennis A. Ross [R-FL]
    Lee Terry [R-NE]

  2. JHoward says:

    Because? Because what’s stopping them?

  3. JD says:

    Fucking clowns, they are.

  4. geoffb says:

    There was a legal battle over this starting back in 1998, L.A. Times v. Free Republic, in which it was decided that only excerpts of articles could be posted and links were to be put in to the original piece for those wishing to read it in its entirety.

    Despite the legal complaints made they real reason the case was filed was that the posters at Free Republic were tearing apart the lies and spin that was being put out as news. Though there were left leaning sites that also copied articles in their entirety since they never took the authors work to task they were not sued. The purpose was to drive conservatives offline.

    Now it appears that excerpting and linking are not enough so a new law is needed to put “those people” back in their place. Notice that nothing like this was needed or sought during the whole of the Bush Presidency. Only now with the “messiah” needing protection for re-election.

  5. newrouter says:

    we don’t need any more laws. we should be repealing laws.

  6. Ernst Schreiber says:

    I guess they can stop the signal Mal.

  7. Ernst Schreiber says:

    we should be repealing laws.

    There’s a law against that.

  8. dicentra says:

    I guess they can stop the signal Mal.

    Ouch.

  9. geoffb says:

    SOPA would allow the government and copyright holders to demand that search engines, Internet providers and ad networks cut ties with websites “dedicated” to copyright infringement.

    Hollywood and the music industry say the measure is necessary to crackdown on online copyright infringement, but many tech companies argue the bill would impose unreasonable burdens on websites and would stifle free speech on the Internet.

    An aide to the House Judiciary Committee Republicans said SOPA is targeted only at rogue sites.

    “Wikipedia is in no way covered by the bill,” the aide said in an email. “The bill only covers foreign rogue websites that are violating federal criminal law or are marketed primarily for use in offering goods or services in violation of federal law.”

    From a quick cursory look at the bill this appears to be true but it is hard to say precisely without a lot of work as much of the bill involves the replacement of text in Federal Titles 17 and 18. PDF here.

  10. geoffb says:

    I should also say that, since I trust people like Harry Reid not a lick, and since if anything passes there will be a conference version bill, this is still a sucky thing to be doing at this point in time. The progressive left is sure to stick something in to make us all “sit down and shutup”.

  11. cranky-d says:

    I don’t care how they plan to apply the law now, I care what happens in the future.

    Basically, what we have is a bunch of buggy-whip manufacturers who want keep making buggy-whips and the government is going to do its best to keep them in business. In the mean time, people don’t want to buy buggy-whips any more.

    However, once you have the infrastructure in place, it will want to find a purpose to keep it going. See the prohibition of alcohol, and after its repeal, the rise of laws against drugs and the enforcement of those laws.

  12. bergerbilder says:

    “The bill only covers foreign rogue websites that are violating federal criminal law or are marketed primarily for use in offering goods or services in violation of federal law.”

    Why don’t we just pass a law that says you can’t break the law.

    “An aide to the House Judiciary Committee Republicans said SOPA is targeted only at rogue sites.”

    Of course, laws never miss the target and cause collateral damage, like, say, charging pro-lifers with RICO violations.

  13. Frontman says:

    I’m sure the irony of Google screaming about it now, given their past history, has not escaped the notice of the folks here.

  14. Frontman says:

    Oh, and the “buttered plunge”? Delicious. I gotta try that one at home.

  15. Spiny Norman says:

    I’m sure the irony of Google screaming about it now, given their past history, has not escaped the notice of the folks here.

    Heh.

    Google:

    Hey, Congress! You can’t do that! Only WE can do that!

  16. Pablo says:

    Douchewads though Google may be, it’s their shit and they can do as they please with it. Bastards.

  17. newrouter says:

    coming soon to a sharia near you:

    Charity carol concert attacked by Congo protesters
    Carol singers raising money for a cancer charity in Trafalgar Square were attacked by protesters during a night of disorder that saw 139 arrests.

    link

  18. cranky-d says:

    The barbarians are not at the gate, we have let them be among us.

  19. Crawford says:

    The attack was ‘egged on’ by teenage girls who screamed and shouted “like the possessed”, another witness said.

    Never have trusted teenage girls. Bloodthirstiest, back-stabbing-est people I’ve ever known.

  20. McGehee says:

    The barbarians are not at the gate, we have let them be cultivated among us.

    FTFY.

  21. Squid says:

    I guess they can stop the signal, Mal.

    That show is the model for how I plan to live my life: go down fighting with honor, then make as good a life as I can for myself and my crew, as far away as possible from the people who defeated my side. And I have no doubts that this will involve ugly compromises, and occasionally shooting somebody.

    On the bright side, I already own a brown coat. So I’ve got that going for me.

  22. Patrick Chester says:

    I guess they can stop the signal, Mal.

    “I aim to misbehave.”

Comments are closed.